Thank you to all of you who anonymously took my church test. As I indicated in the test, your answers to the questions were not for eliciting right or wrong answers from you.
What was my point? To show the folly of how exact we Christians will be with our religion, but how quickly we throw away particulars in order to keep our favored political party in power. The differences we relish – relish! I say! – in the different Christian denominations are seen as stumbling blocks in politics. How can this be? I have non-denominational friends who are, in practice, anti-denominational. Heck, most denominations have orthodox and heterodox sects within the denominations themselves. You can’t even get these folks together over a pot luck, Martha’s award winning three-bean-salad be damned. :-)
While we Christians may lament that we are not one in the details, we defend the differences and are willing to explain them to each and every person who asks.
So, why do we succumb to the two-party political system in the left-hand kingdom, when we would never compromise like this in the right-hand kingdom?
6 comments:
and what, complicate that too! ;-)
Because.
It's a two party system.
There is no other way.
I want to be on the winning team.
If I can't be on the winning team, I want to be on the largest enemy team of the winners.
It's a two party system.
My fingers are in my ears, and I am yelling "I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"
Everything around me tells me that it's a two party system. If I don't vote for one of them, I am throwing my vote away. After all, anyone else CAN'T win, so why vote for them.
It's a two party system.
C'mon. Say it with me.
"It's a two party system."
Here ends the sarcastic mantra.
And, by the way, I believe there are a LOT more Christians out there who are "least-common-denominator" Christians. A lot more than we might think. The largest Lutheran body in America is one such group. The second largest Lutheran body in America contains a majority of these types.
Tooth-and-nail struggle for Truth is a rare and localized occurrence, I suspect. After all, if we are honest about our differences, that means we must not love the others. And don't forget the whole "judge not" misapplication.
I'm in a mood. Sorry.
That's a really interesting argument. Thanks for the post!
Quipper!
I dig the new digs.
Jonathan: when we stop understanding our beliefs to ever-better levels of discernment, we become ignorant. We stifle debate...put it to bed. (Good night, Gracie.)
And, no, my response to you does not mean that you have to gain greater levels of understanding to remain faithful. That would not be "childlike faith".
Scott: You? In a mood? I couldn't tell. I thought the same things as others until Taft & the Republican Party sold me out in OH, and Bush forgot that Republicans were supposed to be for protecting the country AND our liberties (and failed on both).
Marge: Thanks!
Scottius: I dig that you dig my new digs. :-)
Write on, brother! Ya' dun good.
Post a Comment